random memes }

Source code control and precluding errors

If Martin Fowler feels this is worth an article, then perhaps the subject needs elaboration.

MF Bliki: DiffDebugging

I long-ago adopted the habit of reviewing my changes before a checkin.

First, any code into which I have put a significant amount of work goes into CVS.

Once I reach the point where I am making changes to nominally stable software, before I checkin my changes I always review my changes by running: cvs diff | less Why? The usual problem is a bit of debugging code left in I had intended to remove. Less often I find an unintended change or deletion. In any case reviewing the diff takes little time, does catch errors - and in the case described in the article, would most likely have caught the error early.

Must admit that I am a bit bemused by the need to checkout two complete source trees to compare two versions. When I have a similar need the following command does the trick: cvs diff -rtag1 -rtag2 Surely the esteemed Martin Fowler cannot be using something less capable?

Oh - about tags - anytime I generate a build to give someone (anyone) else, I run a script that bumps the compiled-in build number, and tags the source in CVS with that same build number. This guarantees I always can pull out the exact sources for an executable.

None of this is by any means unique, or in any way my invention...